F 

C5sa 
L3a55 


UC-NRLF 


$B    727    31fi 


T  H  IS     B  U  3^  S  T  I  IST  G 


<.)F 


PIERRE  MARGRY'S 


LA  SALLE  BUBBLE 


By  JOHN  GILMARY  SHEA 


R('pr'i}it<ul  ti-iDii   tlw  XftO     York    I'rctiiuin's    /oi/r 


N  E  W    Y  O  R  K  : 
T.  B.  SIDEBOTHAM,  PRINTER,  28  BEEKMAN  STREET. 


879. 


THE     BURSTING 


.     .  .  OF ,  ; ' .  ; 


PIERRE  MARGRY'S 


LA  SALLE  BUBBLE 


By  JOHN  GILMARY  SHEA. 


NEW    YORK: 
T.  13.  SIDEBOTHAM,  PRINTEE,  28  BEEKMAN  STREET. 

1879.       . 


U5?5r 


•     •  •  •  1 


THE  BURSTING  OF  PIERRE  MARGRY'S 
LA  SALLE  BUBBLE. 


For  nearly  twenty  years  Mr.  :pierre  Margry  has 
been  holdiag  over  the  heads  of  American  scholars, 
with  a  great  show  of  mystery,  documentary  evidence 
which  was  to  prove  to  a  certainty  that  his  fellow, 
Norman  Robert  Cavelier,  commonly  known  as  La 
Salle,  was  the  first  to  discover  the  Mississippi,  and 
that  he  had  been  deprived  of  his  just  glory  in  favor 
of  Joliet,  son  of  a  blacksmith,  American  born  at 
that,  and  Marquette,  a  Jesuit.  His  first  claim  was 
tha  La  Salle  descended  the  Ohio  and  Mississippi 
to  its  mouth  in  1670.  This  proving  untenable  he 
claims  that  subsequent  to  that  date  he  descended 
the  Illinois  and  Mississippi. 

Articles  by  him  have  appeared  in  French  jour- 
nals, a  fellow  Norman,  Gravier,  adopted  his  views, 
but  in  this  country  there  was  a  lack  of  faith.  Ban- 
croft had  Margry's  published  articles  and  some  of 
the  documents  in  which  he  relied,  but  did  not  ac- 
cept his  positions.  Mr.  Faillon,  writing  from  docu- 
ments strongly  prepossessed  against  the  Jesuits, 
could  not  embrace  his  views.  Mr.  Parkman,  to 
whom  he  furnished  many  documents,  and  who 
shows  constantly  Margry's  influence,  and  who  had 
apparently  all  that  Margry  relied  upon,  dared  not 
compromise  his  reputation  by  adopting  his  theories. 
Harrisse,  a  bibliographer,  dispassionately  study- 
ing the  question,  found  Margry's  arguments  most 
unsubstantial. 


j^255r?2 


Yet,  with  the  fact  that  not  a  single  American  stu- 
dent of  history  has  ranged  himself  beside  him,  Mr. 
Margry,  in  a  recent  letter  to  Mr.  Lyman  C.  Draper, 
says:  ** These  articles  of  mine  have  greatly  trou- 
bled certain  persons,  as  appears  by  the  meeting  at 
Missilimakinak,  regarding  the  discovery,  more  or 
less  reliable,  of  the  the  remains  of  Father  Mar- 
quette. What  I  said  concerning  Cavelier  de  la 
Salle's  priority  in  discovering  the  Ohio  and  Missis- 
sippi, has  been  the  occasion  of  great  a] id  even  acri- 
monious controversies.  I  care  nothing  for  attacks 
from  which  search  after  truth  is  excluded,  and 
which  are  little  else  than  passion."  This  is  very 
silly.  American  historical  students  have  simply 
given  the  verdict,  "Not  proven,"  as  to  ]Mr.  Mar- 
gry's  theory. 

But  he  has  at  last  shown  his  hand  and  enabled 
us  to  see  all  that  he  has  to  bring  forward  on  the 
subject.  His  exceptional  advantages  in  being  able 
to  investigate  year  after  year  the  French  archives, 
making  copies  of  many  documents  for  the  Cana- 
dian Government,  Mr.  Parkman  and  other  scholars 
enabled  him  to  collect  a  mass  of  material,  that  was 
supposed  to  be  of  great  value.  By  some  lobby  in- 
fluence at  Washington,  an  appropriation,  I  believe 
of  ten  thousand  dollars,  was  made  to  enable  him  to 
print  them.  Three  volumes  have  appeared,  and  it 
must  be  avowed  that  they  are  sadly  disappointiDg. 
They  are  padded  out  and  extended  unjustifiably, 
and  the  new  matter  proves  to  be  comparatively 
little.  The  documents  are  divided  into  classes, 
and  arranged  under  chapters,  with  an  abundance 
of  bastard  titles  and  extended  headings  like  those 
of  a  sensational  newspaper.  The  source  of  the 
document  is  not  given,  except  in  a  confused  way  at 
the  end,  nor  information  furnished  whether  from 


the  copy  is  made  an  original  or  a  copy,  whetber 
late  or  early.  The  first  document  of  all,  the  *'Mem- 
oire  of  the  Recollects,"  is  no  novelty  here.  £t  was 
printed  in  t^ie  Quebec  Abeille,  May  30,  1859,  et 
seq.^  with  notes  by  the  late  accurate  Abb^  Ferland. 
The  summary  of  discoveries,  pp.  35  to  41,  will  be 
found  translated  in  the  "New  York  Colonial  Docu- 
ments," iii.,  p.  507;  pp.  43-55  are  extracts  from 
the  "Jesuit  Relations,"  which  have  been  reprint- 
ed entire  in  Canada.  The  notice  on  Allouez,  pp. 
57  72,  I  used  more  than  twenty- five  years  ago,  and 
he  introduces  it,  as  he  rather  amusingly  tells  us, 
only  to  give  him  a  pretext  for  inserting  an  anti- 
Jesuit  polemical  tract.  The  documents,  pages  76, 
77,  82-9,  91-4,  99-100,  167,  238,  245,  249,  250,  255, 
257,  273,  281,  286,  will  be  found  in  "New  York 
Colonial  Documents,"  ix.,  pp.  29,  41,  64,  67,  65. 
66,  69,  72,  73,  75,  95,  93,  115, 120,  92, 121, 117,  123, 
125,  and  it  would  be  easy  to  extend  the  reference. 
The  letters  pp.  238,  9,  242  are  in  the  "Mifsion  du 
Canada,"  i.,  p.  343,  etc.  If  the  "Relation  of  Jo- 
liet's  Discovery  "  is  virtually  a  copy  of  that  in  his 
hand- writing  preserved  in  the  Seminary  of  St.  Sul- 
pice,  Paris  (Faillon,  Histoire  3,  p.  315 ;  Harrisse, 
p.  322-3),  the  suppression  of  Joliet's  own  letter  on 
the  same  sheet  needs  explanation.  It  does  not 
look  honest;  and  the  note  of  the  editor  on  page 
301,  makes  us  think  he  has  recently  read  "  Tar- 
tuffe."  The  act  of  taking  possession,  page  96,  has 
always  been  published  in  "Tailhan's  Perrot," 
page  292.  And  in  many  cases  he  gives  merely  an 
extract  where  the  "New  York  Documents"  give 
t^ie  entire  paper,  enabling  the  student  to  see  the 
connection  and  understand  the  tone  of  the  whole. 

The  editing  is  very  carelessly  done.     A  letter 
given  on  page  239,  as  of  Father  Gravier,  is  evi- 


6 

dently  of  Father  Julian  Garnier,  who  was  then  in 
the  Seneca  country,  while  Gravier  never  was.  On 
page  255  the  extract  from  Frontenac's  letter  regard- 
ing Jciliet,  has  the  date  suppressed  in  the  text  and 
given  only  in  the  summary,  which  in  view  of  the 
fact  that  the  animus  of  the  whole  c  ^llection  is  to 
assail  Joliet,  does  not  look  accidental. 

There  are,  undoubtedly,  papers  here  made  ac- 
cessible to  historical  students  for  the  first  time, 
but  their  number  and  value  are  not  what  one  would 
expect  from  a  collector  possessing  for  years  the  re- 
markable advantages  of  Mr.  Margry.  The  most 
important  are  really  those  which  give  the  true 
Htory  of  La  Salle's  last  attempt,  exp jse  his  pirati- 
cal object  and  relieve  Beaujeu  frooa  the  odium  so 
1  mg,  so  dit^ingenuously  and  so  persistently  heaped 
upon  him. 

In  his  letter  to  Mr.  Draper,  as  translated  by  Mr. 
James  D.  Butler,  Mr.  Margry  says:  "I  still  very 
firmly  believe  that  La  Salle  discovered  the  Missis- 
sippi by  way  of  the  Lakes,  by  Chicago  and  by  the 
Illinois  River,  as  far  south  as  the  36th  parallel 
and  all  this  before  1673  (the"  date  of  Marquette's 
discovery).  This  opinion  of  mine  I  base  first  on 
the  narrative  made  by  La  Salle  to  the  Abbd  Renau- 
dot."  This  narrative  describes  an  expedition  in 
which  La  Salle  was  engaged  southwest  of  Lake 
Ontario,  for  a  distance  of  four  hundred  leagues, 
and  down  a  river  that  must  have  been  the  Ohio. 
This  was  in  1669. 

The  narrative  proceeds  :  "Some  time  thereafter  he 
made  a  second  expedition  on  the  same  river  which 
he  quitted  below  Lake  Erie,  made  a  portage  of  six 
or  seven  leagues  to  embark  on  that  lake,  traversed 
it  toward  the  north,  ascended  the  river  out  oi 
which  it  flows,  passed  the  Lake  of  Dirty  Water 


(St.  Claire  ?),  entered  the  Freshwater  Sea  (Mer 
Douce),  doubled  the  point  of  land  that  cuts  the 
sea  in  two  (Lakes  Huron  and  Michigan),  and  de- 
scending from  north  to  south,  leaving  on  the 
West  the  Bay  of  the  Puans  (Green  Bay),  discover- 
ed a  bay  infiaitely  larger — at  the  bottom  of  which, 
towards  the  west,  he  found  a  very  beautiful  harbor 
(Ohicago.  Is  there  any  earlier  mention  or  de- 
scription of  that  site  ?)  and  at  the  bottom  of  this 
river  which  runs  from  the  east  to  the  west,  he 
followed  this  river  and  having  arrived  at  about  the 
280th  (sic.)  degree  of  longitude  and  the  39th  of 
latitude,  he  came  to  another  river,  which  uniting 
with  the  first,  flowed  from  the  northwest  te  the 
southeast.  This  he  followed  as  far  as  the  36th  de- 
gree of  latitude,  where  he  found  it  advisable  to 
stop,  contenting  himself  with  the  almost  certain 
hope  of  some  day  passing  by  way  of  the  river  even 
to  the  Gulf  of  Mexico.  Having  but  a  handful  of 
followers,  he  dared  not  risk  a  further  expedition  in 
the  CDurse  of  which  he  was  likely  to  meet  with  ob- 
stacles too  great  for  his  strength.  (See  the  work 
above  mentioned.     Yol.  i.,  p.  378.) 

•*I  base  my  opinion,  secondly,  on  a  letter  of  La 
Salle's  niece — the  Mississippi  and  the  river  Col- 
bert being  both  one.  This  letter,  dated  1756,  says 
the  writer,  possessed  maps  which,  in  1676,  were 
possessed  by  La  Salle,  and  which  proved  that  he 
had  already  made  two  voyages  of  discovery. 
Among  the  places  set  down  on  these  maps,  the 
river  Colbert,  the  place  where  La  Salle  had  landed 
near  the  Mississippi,  and  the  spot  where  he  plant- 
ed a  cross  and  took  possession  of  the  country  in 
the  name  of  the  King  are  mentioned.  (Vol  i.,  p. 
379.) 

"I  base  my  opinion,  thirdly,  on  a  letter  of  Count 


8 

Frontenac.  In  fchis  letter,  which  was  written  in 
1677,  to  the  French  Premier,  Colbert,  Frontenac 
says  that  *'the  Jesuits  having  learned  that  M.  de 
la  Salle  thought  of  asking  (from  the  French 
crown)  a  grant  of  the  Illinois  Lake  (Lake  Michi- 
gan), had  resolved  to  seek  this  grant  themselves 
for  Messrs.  Joliet  and  Lebert,  men  wholly  in  their 
interest,  and  the  first  of  whom  they  have  so  highly 
extolled  beforehand,  although  he  did  not  voyage 
until  after  the  Sieur  de  la  Salle,  who  himself  will 
testify  to  you  that  the  relation  of  the  Sieur  Joliet 
is  in  many  things  false."     (Vol.  i.,  p.  324.) 

'  'In  fine,  I  found  my  opinion  on  the  total  antag- 
onism between  the  Jesuits  and  the  merchants,  as 
well  as  those  who  represented  interest  or  only  a 
legitimate  ambition.  In  opposition  to  the  Jesuits, 
the  Cavelier  de  la  Salle  always  associated  with  the 
Sulpicians  or  Eecollects,  whom  Colbert  had  raised 
up  against  the  Jesuits,  in  order  to  lessen  the  influ- 
ence of  those  who  would  fain  undermine  him. " 

Here,  then,  is  his  case  :  To  prove  La  Salle's 
discovery  of  the  Mississippi  prior  to  1673,  he  relies 
on,  first,  a  document  of  no  date ;  second,  a  letter 
of  1756;  third,  a  letter  of  Frontenac,  in  1677; 
fourth,  the  antagonism  between  the  Jesuits  and  the 
merchants.  He  relies  on  documents  posterior  to 
the  date  of  Joliet  and  Marquette's  voyage,  and  writ- 
ten when  the  results  of  that  voyage  were  known, 
and  on  the  fact  that  the  Jesuits,  as  well  as  the 
Bishop  and  secular  clergy,  including  the  Sulpi- 
tians,  were  at  issue  with  the  merchants,  condemn- 
ing the  sale  of  liquor  to  the  Indians  as  sinful.  This 
last  argument  I  must  dismiss,  for  I  admit  that  my 
mind  fails  to  comprehend  how  the  existence  of  the 
liquor  question  in  Canada,  at  that  time,  can  prove 
that    La  Salle,    who    favored    liquor,   discovered 


9 

water,  whether  in  the  Mississippi,  Lake  Nyanza  or 
the  open  Polar  Sea,  or  by  what  rule  of  mathema- 
tics the  exact  date  of  his  discovery  can  be  deduced 
from  the  fact  of  there  being  a  Liquor  War. 

To  come  to  the  documents.  The  first  one,  and 
that  mainly  relied  upon  by  Mr.  Margry,  is  one  that 
he  tells  us  he  found  in  May,  1845,  in  a  collection 
of  papers  all  hostile  to  the  Jesuits.  Mr.  Margry 
beads  it,  "  Recit  d'un  Ami  de  I'Abb^  de  Galin^e," 
and  adds  in  a  note,  "And  of  the  Abb^  Arnauld. 
The  name  of  this  illustrious  Jansenist,  which  will 
be  found  in  the  text,  should  naturally  put  us  on 
our  gaard  against  the  author  of  thif  document,  the 
original  of  which  is  found  in  a  collection  of  papers 
all  hostile  to  the  Jesuits.  Several  passages  of  this 
manuscript  lead  me  to  think  that  it  is  from  the 
learoed  Abbd  Renaudot,  to  whom  Boileau  address- 
ed his  *  Epistle  on  the  Love  of  God.'  "  In  his  let- 
ter already  quoted,  it  is  ascribed  positively  to  the 
Abb^  Renaudot,  Mr.  Parkman,  who  had  this 
document  and  analyzes  it  in  his  *'  Discovery  <  f  the 
Great  Wtf-t,"  says,  page  101  :  '*  1  am  strongly 
inclined  to  think  that  this  noblemaia  himself 
(Louis  Armand  de  Bourbon,  second  Prince  de 
Oonti),  is  author  of  the  Memoir."  Here  at  once  is 
a  difference  of  opinion,  and  it  ought  to  be  easy  to 
decide  in  34  years  whether  the  document  is  in  the 
handwriting  of  the  Prince  de  Conti  or  of  the  Abb^ 
Renaudot.  If  it  is  a  copy  made  by  nobody  knows 
who  or  when,  of  a  document  written  by  nobody 
knows  who  or  when,  its  value  certainly  cannot  be 
very  great  as  eviden  ce  of  acts  of  La  Salle  between 
1669  and  1673,  for  this  is  the  widest  interval  in 
which  tliis  pretended  discovery  of  the  Mississippi 
could  have  taken  place. 

Mr.  Parkman  says:  "In  one  respect  the  paper 


10 

is  of  unquestiouable  historical  value  ;  for  it  gives 
us  a  vivid  and  not  an  exaggerated  picture  of  the 
bitter  strife  of  parties  which  then  raged  in 'Canada, 
and  which  was  destined  to  tax  to  the  utmost  the 
vast  energy  and  fortitude  of  La  Salle.  At  ticnes 
the  Memoir  is  fully  sustained  by  contemporary  evi- 
dence; but  often,  again,  it  rests  on  its  own  unsup- 
ported authority,"  page  102.  He  might  have  add 
ed,  **  And  is  in  direct  contradiction  to  established 
facts."  Elsewhere  he  says:  "The  writer  himself 
had  never  been  in  America  and  was  ignor  nt  of  its 
geography,  hence  blunders  on  his  part  might  rea- 
sonably be  expected.  His  statements,  however, 
are  in  some  measure  intelligible,"  page  20.  Mr. 
Parkman,  using  it  as  he  does,  and  misled  into 
treating  a  map  made  by  Joliet  himself,  as  one 
made  prior  to  Joliet's  voyage  (See  Harrisse,  notes 
page  197),  candidly  says  :  **  That  he  (La  Salle) 
discovered  the  Ohio  may  then  be  regarded  as  es- 
tablished. That  he  descended  it  to  the  Mississippi 
he  does  not  pretend ;  nor  is  there  reason  to  believe 
that  he  did  so,"  page  23).  "La  Salle  discovered 
tht-  Ohio  and  in  all  probability  the  Illinois  also ; 
but  that  he  discovered  the  Mississippi,  has  not 
been  proved,  nor  in  the  light  of  the  evidence  we 
have,  is  it  likely,"  page  25. 

The  estimate  of  Mr.  Parkman,  will  be  found,  we 
think,  by  his  own  actual  treatment  of  the  docu- 
ment to  be  far  too  high.  He  really  treats  it  as 
worthless. 

In  1669,  the  French  knew  of  a  river  called  by  the 
Iroquois,  Ohio  or  Beautiful  Eiver,  rising  south  of 
Lake  Ontario  and  Lake  Erie,  and  running  west- 
ward. "The  hope  of  beaver,  but  especially  that 
of  flu  ding  thereby  a  passage  1o  the  Gulf  of  Cali- 
fornia (Mer  Vermeille),  where  Mr.  de  la  Salle  be- 


11 


lieved  tliat  the  river  Ohio  emptied,  made  him  un- 
dertake this  voyage,  so  as  not  to  leave  to  another 
the  honor  of  finding  the  way  to  the  Pacific,  and 
thereby  to  China,"  says  the  Abb^  Galinc^e.  He 
obtained  letters  patent  from  de  Oourcelles  in  1669, 
and  set  out  with  two  Sulpitians,  the  Rev.  Dollier 
de  Oasson,  priest,  and  de  Galin^e,  deacon.  They 
left  Montreal  in  seven  canoes,  bearing  21  men, 
July  6,  1669.  They  reached  Sonnuntouau,  a  Seneca 
town,  but  failed  to  obtain  a  guide  to  the  Ohio. 
The  Jebuit  Missionary,  Fremin,  had  gone  to  Onon- 
daga, and  they  had  no  one  able  to  speak  Seneca. 
They  were  told,  however,  that  to  the  Ohio  was  a 
distance  of  six  days'  march  of  twelve  leagues  a  day, 
while  from  Lake  Erie  they  could  reach  it  in  three 
days. 

Failing  to  obtain  a  guide  they  left  the  Seneca 
town,  crossed  the  Niagara  below  the  Falls,  and  on 
the*  24th  of  Septe'aaber,  reached  Tinaoutaoua,  an 
Iroquois  town  on  the  northern  shore  of  Lake  On- 
tario. Here  they  found  Joliet  coming  from  Lake 
Superior.  He  told  them  of  the  Pottawatamies  at 
Green  Bay,  and  their  proximity  to  the  Mississippi. 
Joliet  gave  them  a  written  description  of  the  route 
from  the  Ottawas,  and  apparently  of  a  shorter  one, 
which  an  Iroquais  had  explained  to  him,  and  Gali- 
u^e  embodied  this  information  in  a  map.  Joliet 
also  told  the  Missicmaries  where  he  had  left  a 
canoe  on  Lake  Erie,  With  this  important  aid 
from  Joliet,  Dollier  de  Oa^son  and  his  party  start- 
ed for  the  West  on  the  30th,  to  take  the  route  indi- 
cated by  that  explorer ;  La  Salle,  on  the  pretext  of 
ill-health  remained,  showing  an  inclination  to  re- 
turn to  Montreal.  ("Relation  del'  Abb^  de  la 
Galin^e."  Margry  1,  pp.  112  147.) 

This  gives  an  authentic  and  circumstantial  ae- 


12 

coHnt  of  La  Salle's  first  attempt  to  reacli  the 
Ohio;  and  by  the  testimony  of  Galin^e,  we  find 
Joliet  and  La  Salle  face  to  face  in  this  Indian  vil- 
lage, Joliet  already  cognizant  of  the  West,  and  ex- 
plaining to  La  Salle  and  his  companions  his  idea  of 
the  best  mode  of  reaching  the  Mississippi,  and  of- 
fering them  a  description  which  he  had  drawn  up 
of  his  route.  In  the  question  of  the  priority  be 
tween  La  Salle  and  Joliet,  all  this  is  highly  im- 
portant. 

Now,  let  us  see  how  this  matter  is  treated  in 
Margry's  first  authority. 

The  Second  Part  of  the  Anonymous  Meaaoir, 
headed  '*  Histoire  de  M.  de  la  Salle,"  begins  thus  : 

"  He  left  France  at  21  or  22  years  of  age,  suffi- 
ciently conversant  with  the  last  Eelatious  of  the 
New  World,  and  with  the  design  of  attempting  some 
new  discoveries  there.  After  having  been  some 
time  in  Canada,  having  acquired  sooae  knowledge 
of  the  languages,  and  traveled  northward  where  he 
found  nothing  that  induced  hioa  to  remain,  he  re- 
solved to  turn  southward,  and  having  advanced  for 
this  purpose  to  an  Indian  town,  where  there  was  a 
Jesuit  whose  name  has  escaped  me  (I  do  not  know 
whether  it  was  not  Father  Albantl)  and  where  he 
hoped  to  find  guides,  this  Jesuit  had  notice  of  his 
coming  and  his  design,  went  o£f  to  a  distance,  and 
although  the  Indians  of  that  town,  as  almost  all 
those  of  that  continent,  have  of  themselves  no  re- 
pugnance to  serve  as  guides,  he  could  never  find  a 
single  one  who  would  render  him  that  service.  He 
accordingly  had  to  remain  there  some  time,  during 
which  having  persuaded  those  who  accompanied 
him  to  try  some  fortune,  hoping  to  find  some  Indi- 
ans who  would  guide  him,  he  went  further,  found 
what  he  sought  and  Mr.   Galinee,  who  was  with 


13 

him  and  who  had  gone  to  Canada  only  to  catechise 
the  Indians,  thinking  that  he  could  render  more 
service  in  the  places  where  there  were  Jesuits,  al- 
though he  was  moreover  connected  with  the  Sulpi- 
tiaus,  resolved  to  go  to  the  Ottawas,  which  is  a  nor- 
thern nation,  above  the  Fresh  Water  Sea,  who  carry 
on  a  great  trade  in  beaver.  This  ecclesiastic  had 
asked  a  Mission  from  the  Bishop  of  Canada  and 
that  Bishop  had  sent  him  to  the  Jesuits  to  receive 
a  Mission  from  them.  Mr.  Galin^e,  surprised  at 
this  dismissal,  told  him  that  he  could  not  take  his 
mission  from  the  Jesuits,  if  merely  because  tie  was 
a  licentiate  of  the  Sorbonne,  where  he  would  never 
be  pardoned  for  so  extraordinary  a  step,  but  he 
could  obtain  nothing  from  the  Bishop.  He  never- 
theless set  out,  unable  to  persuade  himself  that 
these  Fathers  would  at  least  prevent  his  baptizing, 
as  he  was  a  deacon.  Accordingly  with  this  hope  he 
left  Mr.  de  la  Salle,  who  thought  very  differently 
from  him,  and  who  assured  him  that  he  would  not 
be  there  Icng ;  and  in  fact  the  Jesuits  thanked  him 
and  promptly  bowed  him  out.  Meanwhile  Mr.  de 
la  Salle  continued  his  way  on  a  river  which  goes 
from  east  to  west  and  passes  to  Onoutagu^  (Onon- 
daga), then  to  six  or  seven  leagues  below  Lake 
Erie,  and  having  reached  the  280th  or  83d  degree 
of  longitude  and  as  far  as  the  41st  degree  of  lati- 
tude, found  a  cataract  which  falls  westward  in  a 
loiv  marshy  country,  all  covered  with  old  stumps 
some  of  which  are  still  standing.  He  was  forced  to 
land,  and  following  a  ridge  which  might  lead  him 
far,  he  found  some  Indians  who  told  him  that  very 
far  from  there,  this  same  river  which  lost  itself  in 
this  low  and  vast  country,  united  again  in  a  single 
bed.  He  accordingly  continued  his  way,  but  as 
the  hardship  was  great,  23  or  24  men  whom  he  had 


14 


conducted  up  to  that  point,  all  left  him  in  one 
night,  regained  the  river  aud  escaped,  some  to  New 
Netherland,  the  others  to  New  England.  He  then 
beheld  himself  alone  four  hundred  leagues  from  his 
home,  to  which  nevertheless  he  succeeded  in  return- 
ing ascending  the  river,  and  living  by  hunting,  on 
herbs  and  what  the  Indians  gave  him  whom  he  met 
on  the  way. 

Some  time  after  that  he  jnade  a  second  attempt 
on  the  same  river,  which  he  left  below  Lake  Erie, 
making  a  portage  of  six  or  seven  leagues  to  embark 
on  that;  lake,  which  he  crossed  to  the  north,  ascend- 
ed the  river  which  forms  this  lake,  passed  Salt  Wa- 
ter Lake,  entered  the  Fresh  Water  Sea,  doubled  the 
point  of  land  which  divides  this  lake  in  two,  and 
descending  it  from  north  to  south,  leaving  on  the 
west  the  bay  of  the  Puants,  discovered  a  bay  infin- 
itely larger,  at  the  head  of  which  on  the  west  he 
found  a  very  fine  harbor,  and  at  the  head  of  this 
harbor  a  river  that  runs  from'  east  to  west.  He  fol- 
lowed this  river  and  having  reached  about  the  280th 
degree  of  longitude  and  39th  degree  of  latitude, 
found  another  river  which,  joining  the  former, 
flowed  from  northwest  to  southeast.  He  followed 
this  river  to  the  36th  degree  of  latitude  where  he 
found  it  advisable  to  stop,  contenting  himself  with 
the  almost  certain  hope  of  being  ene  day  able  to 
pass,  by  following  the  course  of  this  river,  to  the 
Gulf  of  Mexico,  and  not  daring  with  the  small  party 
he  had,  to  hazard  an  enterprise  in  the  course  of 
which  he  might  find  some  obstacle  insuperable  to 
the  means  which  he  had. " 

This  vague  series  of  statements  without  a  single 
date,  or  the  name  of  a  tribe,  or  a  description  of  a 
landmark  is  quoted  to  us  as  historical  authority  ! 
The  first  part  is  covered  by  Galin^e's  careful  nar- 


15 


rative  where  every  date  is  given,  and  the  course 
marked  so  that  it  can  be  traced,  and  that  narrative 
shows  the  falsity  of  this  paper.  La  Salle  and  Dol- 
lier  de  Cassor,  each  impelled  by  the  information 
given  by  some  Seneca  ambassadors  resolved  to  reach 
the  Mississippi,  the  former  to  explore  it  to  its  mouth 
on  the  Pacific,  believing  the  Ohio  the  main  river 
running  constantly  westward ;  (see  Dollier  de 
Casson,  Voyage  de  M.  de  Courcelles.  Margry  1,  p. 
181 ;  N.  Y.  Col.  Doc,  ix.  p.  80).  Dollier  de  Casson, 
a  Sulpitian  priest  to  found  Missions  on  its  banks. 
The  Histoire  de  M.  de  la  Salle  suppresses  Dollier 
de  Casson,  and  invents  a  story  about  Galinee's 
being  refused  a  Mission  by  the  Bishop,  and  being 
sent  to  the  Jesuits.  The  story  is  palpably  false,  as 
his  own  narrative  shows.  He  went  merely  as  assis- 
tant to  Dollier  de  Casson,  who  received  from  Bishop 
Laval,  faculties  such  as  he  had  given  the  year  before 
to  Feaelon.  Mr.  Faillou  describes  them  and  refers 
to  the  Greffe  de  Villemarie,  Archives  Judiciares, 
where  they  are,  dated  May  15th,  1669.  Those  of 
Fdnelon  to  which  he  refers,  are  printed  in  Dollier 
de  Casson 's  History  of  Montreal,  issued  by  the 
Historical  Society  of  that  city,  and  were  recently 
translated  by  me  for  "The  First  Pages  of  Cayuga 
History."  Each  party  fitted  out  its  own  canoes, 
and  neither  seems  to  have  provided  an  interpreter 
knowing  any  Iroquois  dialect.,  so  that  on  reaching 
the  Seneca  country  they  were  helpless.  Then  they 
crossed  the  mouth  of  the  Niagara,  and  proceeded 
to  an  Iroquois  village  on  the  Northern  shore  of 
Lake  Ontario.  If  in  doing  this  La  Salle  can  be 
said  **to  have  gone  further  and  found  what  he 
sought,"  the  Histoire  is  true,  if  not  it  is  false  ;  its 
statement  of  Galinee's  Mission  is  false ;  the  state- 
ment that  he  left  La  Salle  when  they  parted  at  Te- 


16 

naoutaoua,  because  the  Bishop  would  not  give  him 
faculties  is  false  ;  that  he  went  to  the  Jesuits  who 
declined  his  services  i6  false,  by  Galin^e's  own 
showing. 

The  attempt  to  reach  the  Mississippi  by  the  way 
of  the  Seneca  country  having  failed,  Dollier  de 
Casson  and  Galin^e,  acted  on  the  advice  of  Joliet, 
who  gave  them  mformation  sufficient  to  draw  a  map, 
and  they  went  to  Sault  Ste.  Marie  and  the  isles  off 
Green  Bay,  evidently  to  folio  v  the  course  by  the 
Wisconsin  which  Joliet  himself  subsequently  took, 
Galinde's  narrative  shows  that  Joliet  was  conversant 
with,  the  subject,  had  studied  the  country,  made 
no  secret  of  the  route  he  deemed  best,  and  enc®ur- 
aged  others  to  try  it.  And  at  this  time  we  have  no 
evidence  of  any  knowledge  of  the  Mississippi  on 
the  part  of  La  Salle  except  of  the  most  vague  char- 
acter. 

The  Histoire  proceeds  :  "  Meanwhile  Mr.  de  la 
Salle  continued  his  way  on  a  river  which  goes  from 
east  to  west,  and  passes  to  Onondaga,  then  to  six 
or  seven  leagues  below  Lake  Erie."  The  Sulpi- 
tians  left  him  on  the  northern  shore  of  Lake  On- 
tario ;  this  account  transports  him  suddenly  to  a 
river  rising  east  of  Onondaga,  passing  by  that  and 
and  then  running  westward  within  twenty  miles  of 
Lake  Erie.  In  the  Memoire  attributed  to  La  Salle 
himself,  there  is  no  such  absurdity.  He  there 
(Margry  1,  p.  330,)  merely  claims  that  he  discovered 
the  Ohio,  and  continues  :  •*  He  followed  it  to  a 
place  where  it  falls  from  very  high  into  vast  marshes, 
at  37  degrees  North,  after  having  been  swollen  by  an- 
other wide  river  that  comes  from  the  north."  While 
the  Histoire  confusing  everything  says:  "Having 
arrived  at  280  degrees  or  83  degrees  of  longitude, 
and  to  41  degrees  of  longitutle  he  found  a  cataract 


17 


wlii^h  falls  towards    the   west    in  a    low   oiarshy 
counbry  all  covered  with  old  stumps,"  etc. 

That  La  Salle  really  reached  the  Ohio  is  gener- 
ally admitted  ;  but  neither  of  these  accounts  en- 
ables us  to  fix  the  point  to  which  he  followed  it. 
There  is  certainly  no  high  fall.  The  rapids  at 
Louisville  cannot  be  so  called,  and  the  wide  river 
from  the  north  is  wanting  as  well  as  the  marshes 
through  which  an  Indian  canoe  could  not  pass.  To 
assume  that  be  reached  the  Mississippi,  and  make 
it  the  «?ide  river  from  the  north  flowing  into  the 
Ohio,  makes  the  allusion  to  the  high  falls  absurd, 
as  there  are  certainly  none  on  the  Mississippi  below 
the  mouth  of  the  Ohio.  The  Histoire  so  far  from 
removing  doubts,  thicken  them. 

Its  sequel,  that  he  kept  ou  his  way  by  a  ridge, 
till  his  23  or  24  men  deserted  him,  and  made  their 
way  to  New  Netherland  (New  York),  or  New  Eng- 
land, which  must  mean  Virginia,  does  not  look 
probable.  Galin^e  says  that  La  8alle  proposed 
takiug  five  canoes  and  fourteen  men,  and  Dollier  de 
Cassou,  three  canoes  and  seven  men,  but  that  they 
really  started  with  seven  canoes,  each  with  three 
meu.  After  they  parted  company  La  Salle  could 
not  have  had  twenty-three  or  twenty-four  men  as- 
his  share  of  the  twenty- one.  While  we  admit  La 
Salle's  discovery  of  a  river,  it  cannot  be  on  this  con- 
fused and  distorted  Memoir.  We  have  in  favor  of 
it  La  Salle's,  not  very  intelligible  account,  for 
neither  the  Ohio  nor  the  Mississippi  meets  the 
case,  a  subsequent  reference  to  the  Ohio  as  a  river 
he  discovered,  the  recognition  of  La  Salle's  claim  ou 
Joliet's  maps,  and  the  passage  in  Talon's  letter  to 
the  King,  November  2, 1671,  which  we  may  justly 
refer  to  this  exploration.  The  Histoire  adds  noth- 
ing to  these. 


18 

The  next;  statement  in  the  Histoire  is  the  one  on 
which  Mr.  Margry  relies  to  prove  that  La  Salle 
discovered  the  Mississippi  before  Marquette  and 
Joliet's  voyage  in  1673.  Its  statement  is  that  some 
time  after  his  discovery  of  the  Ohio,  that  is  an  in- 
definite time  after  an  unsettled  date,  La  Salle  made 
a  second  attempt  on  the  same  river,  and  leaving  it, 
reached  Lake  Erie  by  a  portage  of  six  or  seven 
leagues,  taking  the  route  which  Galinee  says  the 
Senecas  recommended,  that  of  the  Muskingam,  and 
Cuyahoga,  or  Scioto  and  Sandusky,  or  that  referred 
to  later  by  La  Salle,  the  Maumee  and  Wabash. 
That  he  then  crossed  Lake  Eiie,  ascended  the  St. 
Clair,  entered  Lake  Michigan,  and  at  the  head  of 
the  lake  found  a  fine  harbor,  which  seems  to  cor- 
respond to  Chicago,  and  to  give  the  narrative  the 
widest  interpretation,  from  this  place  reached  a  river 
running  west,  the  Illinois,  which  he  followed  to  the 
Mississippi,  and  descended  that  river  to  latitude  39 
degrees  North,  longitude  280  degrees  West,  where  an- 
other river,  the  Missouri,  came  from  the  northwest, 
and  passing  its  mouth  he  kept  on  to  36  degrees 
North. 

As  this  pretended  discovery  is  mentioned  on  no 
document  of  the  time,  it  rests  solely  on  this  Recit 
and  Histoire;  and  the  credibility  of  this  paper 
must  be  tested.  Its  very  form  is  against  it ;  it  is 
without  name  or  date,  but  evidently  more  recent 
than  1678,  when  Joliet's  voyage  was  known.  As  to 
La  Salle's  voyage  it  gives  no  dates  or  details  as  to 
the  number  of  his  men,  the  name  of  a  single  one 
who  accompanied  him,  persons  met  at  any  point  of 
the  route,  the  lime  occupied  on  the  voyage.  There 
is  nothing  that  could  not  have  been  derived  from 
Joliet's  account  of  the  Mississippi.  In  itself  the 
Recit  and  Histoire  is  utterly  worthless  as  histori- 


19 


eal  evidence.  It  abounds  in  statements  easily  re- 
futed, and  so  preposterous  that  Mr.  Parkman  and 
Margry  have  hitherto  consigned  them  to  oblivion, 
Mr.  Parkman  showing  his  contempt  of  them,  by 
never  alluding  to  them  in  his  *'  Jesuits  of  North 
America"  or  *  'Discovery  of  the  Great  West. "  Thus  it 
charges  that  the  Jesuits  at  Mackinac  and  Sault 
Ste.  Marie  had  soldiers  whom  they  drilled  in  the 
use  of  weapons  ;  and  though  we  have  Galinde's,  La 
Salle's,  Hennepin's,  and  even  La  Hon  tan's  accounts 
of  visits  to  Mackinac,  not  one,  though  all  unfriend- 
ly to  the  Jesuits,  even  hints  at  such  a  state  of  things, 
nor  does  Frontenac  ever  charge  this  in  the  de- 
spatches where  he  gathers  all  he  can  against  them. 

More  vile  than  this  is  the  charge  that  Brebeuf, 
Daniel  and  the  other  Jesuits  killed  on  the  Huron 
Mission  died  fighting  ;  and  that  Father  Garnier 
shot  down  three  men  before  he  fell.  It  would  be 
necessary  simply  to  read  this  precious  document  of 
Margry's,  and  Garnier's  letters  to  decide  which 
was  the  honest  man.  The  charge  that  Brother  le 
Boeme  killed  two  Sioux  at  Sault  Ste.  Marie,  that 
Bishop  Laval  kept  an  open  shop  in  his  house,  are 
a  sample  of  the  style  of  the  whole  paper. 

It  professes  to  be  made  from  conversations  with 
La  Salle,  notes  being  taken  after  each  interview, 
yet  it  is  filled  with  professed  inability  to  recollect 
names,  and  shows  that  the  writer  had  access  to  dis- 
patches of  Frontenac  from  which  some  of  the  mat- 
ter is  drawn,  as,  for  mstance,  Hennepin's  visit  to 
Father  Bruyas,  whose  name  in  his  usual  style  this 
author  professes  to  forget.  As  a  sample  of  his 
honesty  take  this  :  "  The  Jesuits  had  sent  to  France, 
more  than  a  year  ago,  one  of  their  Donnd  Brothers, 
named  Joliet,  with  another  map  made  from  hearsay, 
and  this  Donn^  Brother  took  to  himself  the  honor 


20 


of  this  discovery.  This  imposture  did  not  sncceed 
to  the  houor  of  this  Donn^  Brother,  who  according 
to  all  appearances  did  not  meet  the  questions  usually 
made  on  such  occasions,  and  Mr.  Galin^e  gave  one 
of  my  friends  to  understand  that  he  knew  no  one 
but  Mr.  de  la  Salle  capable  of  having  made  that 
discovery. " 

Are  we  to  take  this  as  history  ?  To  make  Joliet 
a  Donnd,  one  of  those  humble  workingmeu  who 
from  zeal  gave  their  services  at  the  Missious;  to 
say  that  Joliet  who,  as  Galinde  tells  us,  gave  La  Salle 
and  DoUier  de  Casson  a  description  of  the  route  to 
the  West,  and  told  them  the  most  practicable  route 
to  the  Mississippi,  made  his  map  of  the  river  from 
hearsay  ;  to  jail  his  claim  an  imposture  when  Frou- 
tenac  anaounces  his  mission  by  authority,  and  when 
the  Government  subsequently  rewarded  him  for  it,  is 
w»  rse  than  a  crime  ;  it  is  a  blunder.  Marquette  and 
Jolipt  with  only  five  men  faced  dangers  from  which 
Dollier  de  Casson  and  Galinde  with  better  equip- 
ment recoiled  ;  they  carried  out  the  expli>ration  with 
fewer  men  than  La  Salle  had  in  his  ineffectual  at- 
tempt to  reach  the  Ohio ;  far  fewer  than  the  force 
with  which  he  finally  reached  the  exaggerated  rapids 
at  Louisville,  the  only  falls  his  advocates  can  find. 

This  paper  Mr.  Margry  did  wisely  to  keep  back 
for  thirty  years,  and  the  United  States  Government 
would  have  done  wisely  to  keep  it  thirty  years  be 
fore  printing  it  as  history.  We  may  almost  expect 
to  see  Barou  Munchausen  issue  from  the  Govern- 
ment printing  oflB.ee. 

To  seek  to  establish  any  historical  fact  on  the 
mere  authority  of  this  miserable  anonymous  libel  is 
ridiculous.  But  it  may  be  said  that  Mr.  Margry 
has  a  document  to  support  it.  Let  us  examine  it. 
This  other  document,  relie.l  upon  by  Mr.  Margry, 


21 


is  a  letter  of  Magdalen  Cavelier,  Dame  Leforestier, 
a  niece  of  La  Salle's,  written  more  than  eighty 
years  after  the  period  of  the  discovery  of  the  Mis- 
sissippi. It  shows  her  to  be  very  ignorant.  Al- 
most every  word  is  misspelt.     It  runs  thus  : 

•*This  21  January  1756. 

"As  soon,  sir,  your  letter  received,  I  sought  a 
safe  way  to  send  you  the  papers  of  Mr.  de  la  Sille. 
There  are  maps  which  I  have  joined  to  these  pa- 
pers, which  ought  to  serve  to  prove  that  m  1675  Mr. 
de  la  Salle  had  already  made  two  voyages  in  these 
discoveries,  siuce  shere  is  a  map  which  I  send  you, 
by  which  mention  is  made  of  the  place  where  Mr. 
de  la  Salle  landed  near  the  river  Misipi,  another 
place  that  he  calls  River  Oobrer,  in  another  he  takes 
possession  of  this  country  in  the  name  of  the  king 
and  plants  a  cross,  another  place  that  he  calls  Fron- 
tenac,  the  river  Saint  Lorans  at  another  place.  You 
will  see  in  these  pieces  the  review  made  in  the 
fort,  which  he  built  of  stone,  which  was  of  wood. 
You  will  find  the  receipt  of^Mr.  Duchesneau  for  in- 
tendant  of  9000  liv.  which  Mr.  de  la  Salle  had  paid 
him  to  indemnify  those  who  had  ma  ie  this  fort  of 
wood. " 

Now  what  is  there  in  this?  Simply  that  he  had 
made  two  voyages  of  exploration  by  1675,  fixing,  as 
it  were,  1675  as  the  date  of  his  visit  to  the  Missis- 
sippi, and  yet  the  whole  tenor  makes  it  clear  that 
the  map  was  made  subsequent  to  his  voyage  to  the 
mouth,  and  his  planting  a  cross  there,  taking  pos- 
session in  the  king's  name.  Certainly  there  is 
nothing  here  to  prove  that  he  visited  the  Mississip- 
pi before  Joliet.  The  use  of  the  name  Colbert, 
which  was  given  by  Joliet,  is  evidence  that  the  map 
was  later  than  his  discoveries.  But  the  letter  is  too 
vague  to  amount  to  anything.    The  lady  was  a  par- 


22 

ty  to  a  suit  many  years  before,  and  the  papers  in 
her  hands  must  have  all  been  canvassed  then.  No 
trace  of  such  a  claim  appears  at  that  time. 

It  may  be  said  that  the  remark  of  Talon,  in  1671, 
refers  really  to  La  Salle's  expedition,  in  which  he 
discovered  the  Mississippi,  and  that  the  Ohio  dis- 
covery took  place  before  and  immediately  after 
parting  with  DoUier  de  Casson.  This  theory  can- 
not stand  for  a  moment.  Talon,  writing  by  the  ves- 
sels that  sailed  in  November,  1671,  announces  that 
La  Salle  had  not  yet  returned  from  his  explorations. 
We  are  then  to  believe  that  La  Salle  returned  from 
the  West  and  announced  to  Talon  in  December,  1671, 
or  early  in  1672,  that  he  had  reached  the  great  river 
of  the  West,  and  descended  it  to  36  degrees  North ; 
and  that  Talon  either  disbelieved  the  whole  story 
and  treated  it  as  a  fiction,  or  else  forgot  it  as  soon 
as  he  heard  it.  Certainly,  by  the  time  the  sum- 
mer of  1672  came.  Talon  was  not  influenced  by  La 
Salle's  report,  if  there  was  any  report,  or  he  would 
not  have  despatched  Joliet  to  the  West  to  try  and 
discover  the  very  river  that  La  Salle  had  just  ex- 
plored. As  Talon  has  a  reputation  of  being  some- 
thing bfctter  than  an  idiot,  we  must  hold  that  when 
he  sent  Joliet  to  discover  and  explore  the  Missis- 
sippi, he  had  no  intelligence  of  its  discovery  and 
exploration  by  any  one  else. 

Had  he  known  of  La  Salle's  discovery  and  treat- 
ed it  as  an  imposture,  La  Salle,  on  going  to  France, 
in  1674,  would  undoubtedly  have  protested  against 
the  wrong  done  him,  and  in  working  against  Joliet's 
Illinois  project,  in  1677,  would  have  used  his  claim 
of  prior  discovery.  Even  at  a  later  date,  when  he 
made  the  voyage  down,  which  is  so  fully  chroni- 
cled, he  merely  criticized  Joliet's  account,  admit- 
ting his  voyage,  without  pretendmg  to  have  anti- 
cipated him. 


23 

Indeed,  he  admits  Joliet's  priority  :  **  It  is  true 
that  the  Sieur  Joliet,  to  anticipate  him,  made  a 
voyage,  in  1673,  to  the  River  Colbert,"  says  La 
Salle,  himself.     (Margry,  2,  p.  285.) 

Moreover,  we  have  La  Salle's  osv^n  evidence,  in 
regard  to  this  Chicago  route.  In  his  letter  of  Sep- 
tember 29,  1680  (Margry,  2,  p.  79),  he  claims  the 
discovery  of  the  Ohio,  and  extols  its  superiority 
over  the  Wisconsin,  "the  route  by  which  Joliet 
passed."  On  p.  95,  he  decries  the  Chicago  route, 
as  if  it  had  been  extolled  by  others ;  and  on  p.  167, 
explicitly  eays  that  it  was  recommended  by  Joliet, 
and  on  p.  137,  he  states  that  the  name  Divine  was 
given  to  the  river  by  Joliet. 

Now,  is  it  possible  that  he  could  have  taken  this 
route  to  the  Mississippi  prior  to  the  voyage  of  Mar- 
quette and  Joliet,  and  consequently  before  Joliet 
ever  saw  this  Chicago  river,  and  yet  never  allude  to 
the  fact,  but  on  two  occasions  associate  Joliet  with 
it  as  discoverer,  namer  and  recommender.  "Would 
he  not  have  asserted  his  own  claim,  and  not  fallen 
back,  as  he  habitually  does,  on  his  discovery  of 
the  Ohio? 

It  seems  strange  that  La  Salle,  without  having 
explored  the  Mississippi,  could  have  gone  to  France 
and  obtained  a  grant  when  Joliet,  the  real  discover- 
er, met  a  refusal.  But  it  is  not  stranger  than  to 
see  our  Government,  without  any  examination,  give 
money  to  Mr.  Margry  to  print  papers  already  ac- 
cessible, or  not  worth  printing,  when  papers  of  the 
highest  interest  to  our  country  lie  unprinted  here. 
However,  it  is  almost  impossible  to  fix  a  time  when 
La  Salle  could  have  gone  to  the  Mississippi  before 
his  voyage  to  France,  in  the  autumn  fleet  of  1674. 

That  he  had  not  made  the  discovery  up  to  No- 
vember 2,  1671,  seems  certain  from  Talon's  dis- 


24 

patch.  That,  after  his  return  from  Ohio,  he  start- 
ed westward,  and  forestalled  Marquette  and  Joliet, 
or  went  while  they  were  actually  on  the  river,  it  is 
impossible  to  believe.  There  would  have  been  some 
notice  somewhere  of  the  rival  attempts.  In  the 
summer  of  1673,  he  was  Fronteaac's  messenger  to 
the  Iroquois  cantons;  at  Easter,  in  1674,  he  was 
creating  a  disturbance  in  the  church  at  Montreal ; 
in  November  he  went  to  France. 

La  Salle's  prior  discovery  of  the  Mississippi  is 
a  bubble,  which  Mr.  Margry,  by  giving  in  articles 
merely  fragments  of  documents,  has  ingeniously 
blown  to  an  immense  size.  It  staggered  many 
who  thought  that  there  must  be  something  in  it. 
Clear  heads  like  Harrisse,  Tailhan,  Faillou,  ex- 
amined his  arguments  carefully,  so  far  as  they 
had  the  documents,  and  decided  that  he  failed  to 
prove  his  case.  Mr.  Parkman,  more  guardedly, 
reaches  the  same  result.  Now  that  we  have  all 
that  he  relies  ©n,  the  bubble  bursts  and  vanishes 
into  thin  air ;  it  is  merely  a  monstrous  hoax  that 
he  has  been  playing. 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 
BERKELEY 

Return  to  desk  from  which  borrowed. 

This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 

DEC  12  1947 

TJan'eiWZ 

6iJa'59WJ 

JAN  10  '361 

REC'O  CO 

'-}MAf^y  USE 

_ 

^^am> 

OCT  6    a53 

LD  21-100m-9,'47(A5702sl( 

5)476 

ivi255772 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


